Stays well informed about
professional issues and share this information with appropriate people

4

3.94

+.06

Demonstrates ethical, trustworthy and
professional behavior

4

3.84

+.016

Communicates effectively and openly
with teachers and staff

4

3.94

+.06

I’d like to share a couple of strategies intended to improve on my weaknesses. In regards to
student misconduct, we are examining the use of restorative justice. We’ve used
it with great successes multiple times first term, and I think we can use it
more. It’s non-traditional. I’ve blogged about it here.
Additionally, it’s important that I make dealing with misconduct a higher
priority. Far too often, minor referrals have been placed on the back burner.
Finally, I will do a better job of discussing and explaining disciplinary
matters with the referring teacher.

In regards, to the second and third lowest-scoring
statements, my hope is to have more frequent conversations with teachers. In
addition to scheduling walk-throughs and observations, I’ll be scheduling
follow-up conversations (so don’t be surprised to see calendar reminders). In
addition to providing targeted feedback, these conversations will give us an
opportunity to discuss student progress.After all, student progress is
responsibility shared by students, teachers and administrators.

When I
interviewed for this job, I said my job would be to make the job of teachers
easier, more efficient and better, so I take your responses to heart.

If you’re an experienced teacher, you’ve been asked the
above question too many times to count. We need not look any further to provide
definitive proof that our archaic grading system has failed our students.

Instead of being motivated to learn,
students enter our classrooms motivated solely by grades. The good students
have learned to play the game. They turn their work in on time, answer a couple
of questions in class, fulfill the rubric’s requirements, and occasionally—when
necessary—they complete extra credit to ensure they’ve accrued the necessary
points.

The end of the marking period arrives and the student has
“earned” an A. At an awards ceremony, the student receives an Honor Roll Certificate;
her name is published in the school newsletter and maybe even in the local
paper. Perhaps, she even receives a
certificate for a free pizza from the local pizza parlor. Her parents proudly
display their “My Child is an Honor Roll Student at XYZ Middle School.” So
while seemingly, everyone wins, nothing could be further from the truth.

Our current “if-then” grading system rewards students for compliance,
instead of learning. With the focus on outcomes, students will take the
shortest and easiest path to the A, including cheating. Such a system takes
away from the love of learning and reinforces superficial learning, instead of
true understanding.

By ditching our current grading system in favor of the SE2R
Approach or another Standards-Based Learning system, students will take control
of their learning. As Daniel Pink suggests in Drive, “increasing student autonomy promotes greater conceptual understanding,
better grades, and enhanced persistence at school and in sporting activities,
higher productivity, less burnout, and greater levels of psychological
well-being.”

Ridding our schools of our antiquated grading system won’t
be easy, but doing so will increase student learning and their love of
learning.

Thursday, January 23, 2014

For many, the word “assessment” conjures up thoughts about
all that’s wrong with education: standardized testing, final exams, grades,
etc.

But an effective assessment strategy actually eliminates
grades. A 1991 study by Masaharu Kage revealed grading quizzes lowered
students’ intrinsic motivation and led to poorer learning when compared to
self-monitored, non-evaluative quizzes. Other studies have similar results.

Because assessments should be part of the learning process,
it’s important to involve students in the assessment process. Increasing
student involvement in the assessment process and detaching grades from them
increases learning.

Here’s a simple strategy that involves students in the
assessment process, creating a sense of ownership and increasing their
commitment to learning.

1.Students complete a formative assessment. This
can be a quiz, classwork, homework, etc.

2.After completing the assessment, students
turn their work into the teacher. If you’re concerned about student confidentiality,
have students use random IDs instead of their names.

3.Working individually, in groups, or as a class,
students work solve the assessment. Students create a separate “answer key.”
While students work, the teacher provides assistance, informally assesses
performance and determines whether re-teaching will be necessary.

4.Students return the corrected work to their
teacher who then passes it back to the original student. This step allows the teacher to further
measure student understanding.

5.Students keep a copy of their “answer key” and
use that to double-check their peer’s feedback.

By working with the students through the entire process, the
teacher uses the assessment as a source of information and, if necessary, can
provide high-quality corrective re-teaching. Students receive instant, specific
and descriptive feedback without the stigma attached to grades. Working together, the teacher and the students
make choices about what to focus on next in their learning.

With the emphasis on learning and mastery, students will be
more intrinsically motivated and more willing to take risks to expand their
learning.

References

Kage, M. The effects
of evaluation on intrinsic motivation. Paper presented at the meetings of
the Japan Association of Education Psychology, Joetsu, Japan.

Sunday, January 19, 2014

Until about 10 years ago, I, like far too many educators,
believed in learning styles, multiple intelligence theories and the like.
Several scholarly articles and Daniel Willingham’s Why Students Don’t Like School (2009) enlightened me.

Today I cringe when my well-meaning peers talk about
using—sometimes even paying for—learning style inventories, or developing
lessons to account for students’ different learning styles or creating student
profiles that travel with students from middle school to high school.

So why do so many
educators continue to believe in the notion of learning styles?

We’re surrounded by
“professional” resources

An entire industry has developed around learning styles
instruction. We’ve seen the proliferation of professional articles and books,
including those published by otherwise reputable companies/organizations like
ASCD,Phi Delta Kappan, and Edutopia. Teacher’s
editions of textbooks frequently include strategies to reach visual, auditory,
and/or kinesthetic learners. Finally, we receive mailings inviting us to attend
workshops and trainings guaranteed to improve student learning through learning
styles.

Inherently learning
styles makes sense

After attending one of these workshops about twenty years
ago, I left feeling better prepared to teach. Learning styles seemingly offered
a quick, simple solution. In implementing instruction based on learning styles,
I could increase motivation, improve student attitudes toward learning and thus
improve achievement.

For the next decade, I developed lessons based on learning
styles. Students took learning style inventories. I differentiated instruction
based on student strengths (wait a pain!). Yet, not a single study provides
evidence that understanding students’ learning styles improves learning. How much time and energy did I waste? How much
learning was lost by my naivety?

The idea behind
learning styles makes sense. People are different, so they must learn
differently. Except we don’t.

OK, but what’s the
danger in using learning styles?

This can best be answered with an example. John is a seventh-grader
who struggles with reading and writing, but excels in art. John’s middle school
teachers administer a learning styles inventory and not surprisingly, in
regards to VAK (Visual-Auditory-Kinesthic), John is found to be a
visual/spatial learner. Using this data, John’s teachers create lessons geared
towards his “strength.” In history class, instead of writing, John draws
cartoons. For English, instead of writing a book report, John creates a
diorama. While giving John choices may increase his motivation, John is missing
out on the opportunity to improve his writing skills.

John’s eighth grade teachers go a step further. Students are
grouped according to their learning styles. Like many of his classmates, John
is placed in the Visual/Spatial group. John’s teachers create lessons targeting
his supposed strengths, instead of providing instruction to improve his reading
and writing.

Upon entering high school, John lags behind many peers when
it comes to reading and writing. When John’s English teacher requires him to
write papers, he struggles mightily.Poor grades follow. When his teacher
approaches him about his struggles, John responds, “I’m not verbal/auditory
learner. I do best with visuals.”

John’s well-meaning teachers have labeled him. Now John has
labeled himself.Such labels shape
expectations, lead to exaggerations and perpetuate the notion that a student is
not capable—or not as capable—of success. Labeling students according to
supposed preferred learning styles isn’t just unreliable and ineffective; it’s
downright dangerous.

I've previously written about What Works In Education, what doesn't work is using Learning Styles, whether its Visual-Auditory-Kinesthetic Learning, Multiple Intelligences, VARK, or some other form. Yet well-meaning educators continue to use such approaches despite the overwhelming evidence against their effectiveness (and even possible harm).

Below are 10 statements disproving the value of incorporating learning styles in instruction.

Learning style inventories make use of forced-response
choices causing people to make the same choices. “Nearly everybody would prefer
a demonstration in science class to an uninterrupted lecture. This doesn’t mean
that such individuals have a visual style, but that good science teaching
involves demonstrations.” (Stahl)

Some of the best known and widely used instruments have
such serious weaknesses (e.g. low reliability, poor validity, and negligible
impact on pedagogy) that we recommend that their use in research and practice
be discontinued. (Coffield)

Recognition of individuals’ strengths and weaknesses is good
practice; using this information, however, to categorize children and prescribe
methods can be detrimental to low-performing students. Although the idea of
reading style is superficially appealing, critical examination should cause
educators to be skeptical of this current educational fad. (Snider)

It is nonsense to hold the idea that some of your students
can be classified as visual learners, whereas others, within the same class are
auditory learners. There is simply no known validity to making any such
classifications on the basis of either neurology or genuine behavioural
performance. (Hattie)

There is not adequate evidence base to justify incorporating
learning styles assessments into general education practice. Thus, limited
education resources would better be devoted to adopting other educational
practices that have strong evidence base, of which there are an increasing
number. (Pashler, McDaniel, Rohrer, & Bjork)

"VAK (Visual-Auditory-Kinesthetic) is “’nonsense’ from a neuroscientific point of view.
‘Humans have evolved to build a picture of the world through our senses working
in unison, exploiting the immense interconnectivity that exists in the
brain….The rationale from employing VAK learning styles appears to be weak.
After more than 30 years of educational research into learning styles there is
no independent evidence that VAK, or indeed any other learning style inventory,
has any direct educational benefits.” ~Susan Greenfield, director of the Royal Institute and a
professor of pharmacology at Oxford University (Henry)

The scientific research on learning
styles is “so weak and unconvincing,” concluded a group of distinguished
psychologists in a 2008 review, that it is
not possible “to justify incorporating learning-styles assessments into general
educational practice.” A 2010 article
was even more blunt: “There is no credible evidence that learning styles
exist,” wrote University of Virginia cognitive scientist Daniel Willingham and
co-author Cedar Riener. While students do have preferences about how they
learn, the evidence shows they absorb information just as well whether or not
they encounter it in their preferred mode. (Murphy Paul)

Because the vast majority of
educational content is stored in terms of meaning and does not rely on visual,
auditory, or kinesthetic memory, it is not surprising that researchers have
found very little support for the idea that offering instruction in a child's
best modality will have a positive effect on his learning. (Willingham)

There
are undoubtedly individual differences inperceptual acuities which are modality
based, and include visual, auditory and kinaesthetic sensations (although smell
and taste are more notable), but this does not mean that learning is restricted
to, or even necessarily associated with, one’s superior sense.(Geake)

The vast majority of educators will
tell you that learning styles are a proven fact. But they’re not. They are an
unproven theory that may be useful. Stop assuming that just because other
teachers say something is so, that they’re right. Stop assuming that because
most everyone treats learning styles as an accepted “fact” that they are right.
(Jensen)

Jensen, Eric. "Are Learning Styles
a Big Hoax? What Does the Latest Science Say About Different Learners?" Brain
Based Learning Brain Based Teaching Articles From Jensen Learning Are Learning
Styles a Big Hoax What Does the Latest Science Say About Different Learners
Comments. N.p., 4 May 2010. Web. 19 Jan. 2014.

Sunday, January 12, 2014

Our school’s mission includes, “We are committed to ensuring each person
fulfills his or her potential."

In prior years, our discipline model was pretty scripted. Incidents were reported to administrators, we investigated the matter and
dispensed the appropriate consequence according to our Code of Condct.We conveyed information. When a student did x, y was the consequence.

This year, we’ve made greater use of restorative
justice. Restorative justice teaches. Students look deeply at themselves, and
their mistakes. They examine why they made them and truly think about what they
could have done to avoid them—both in the past and in the future.

I entered education not to simply convey information or to
dispense consequences, I entered education to shape character, to, as our
mission statement reads, “ensure each person fulfills his or her potential.”

As a high school teacher, I know I’ve said to students,
“When you get into college…”

Do colleges know what’s best? No.

Should our educational decisions be shaped or dictated by
colleges? Sometimes. Without a doubt, we must prepare our students for colleges
and careers and far too many college freshman have to take remedial classes. But far too often educational decisions made by college professors
are not based on educational research and learning.

Two examples of poor educational practices highlighted by
our recent graduate panel include the use of lectures and college assessment
practices. Lectures/direct instruction prevail at most colleges, but research
proves that they are far from the most effective means of instruction.
Secondly, many college classes rely solely on one or two exams or papers to
calculate grades, but study after study shows that numerous short assessments
given over time are a better indicator of learning (Ainsworth and Viegut,
2006).

The college admissions process has become so warped and
hyper-competitive that students scratch and claw to get ahead of their peers.
At the heart of this unhealthy competition: poor grading practices. The bell curve,
commonly used in higher education, compares student performance against other
students rather than their mastery of the content. In terms of the admissions
process, most colleges insist on GPA ranks, leading to grades being used to ranking
and sorting students. Is it any wonder why grades, instead of learning, become
the motivation?

Unhealthy competition isn’t limited to just grades, however.
Students—and educators—feel compelled to participate in and offer multiple résumé
enhancers. Honor societies, clubs, and other extracurricular activities have
proliferated. None of this is inherently bad; as a matter of fact, it’s
important that we do provide as many extracurricular activities as possible for
our students. But, when students spread themselves so thin with the idea of
padding their application that they become overly stressed, sleep-deprived
robots, we’ve gone too far.

Sadly, far too often higher-education policies have trickled
down into our high schools. It’s as if institutes of higher learning are the
tail and secondary schools are the dog.

Wednesday, January 1, 2014

This past week I overheard two conversations that reminded me
of the need for standards-based grading.

Conversation 1: in produce section of grocery store between
a parent and a middle school teacher who I’ll call Mr. Smith

Parent: Good to see you Mr. Smith. How’s Jon [another
pseudonym] doing?

Mr. Smith: Jon’s one of my best students. His test scores
are always among the best in the class. I think he had the highest score on the last test.

Parent: That’s great! He really enjoys your class.

Mr. Smith: Thanks. He's a pleasure to teach.

What's wrong with this conversation?

Simply, why is the teacher comparing Jon’s performance against
other students? Assessments and grades should be used to provide meaningful
feedback in relation to learning objectives. Grades should never be used to
rank and sort students. I'm sure the teacher meant well and the parent was clearly pleased with this impromptu progress report, but does the parent truly know How's my child doing?

Conversation 2: overheard at a basketball game

Parent: Did you get your test back?

Middle school student: (Sheepishly) Yes.

(Parent tilts her head and gives her daughter “the eye.”)

Student: I got a 60. But everyone did badly.

(Long pause as parent simply stares through the child.)

Student (with cautionary optimism): She gave us an extra credit assignment to pull up
our grade.

Parent: Get it out and start working on it.

What's wrong with this conversation?

I applaud the teacher for recognizing that the entire class
struggled on the test (assuming the student didn’t make it up). But instead of
assigning an extra credit assignment to raise students’ grades, the teacher
should be reflecting on her own professional practices to ensure improved
achievement. This should include re-teaching and re-assessment.

While some extra credit assignments do equate to increased
learning or mastery of the objective, most extra credit assignments dilute the
meaning of grades. For example, in this case, it sounds as if the student simply
needs to complete additional work to raise her grade; meaning the quantity of
work becomes more important than the quality of the understanding.

If, as the student stated, most students did poorly, it’s
not a learning problem. It’s a teaching problem that requires corrective
action.

Four Standards-Based Grading Principles Relevant to These Conversations

Grades should focus on results rather than activities. Emphasis should be on learning and not competition and
completion.

Assessments provide information for students AND teacher.

If a particular concept or skill
is worth assessing then it’s important enough to teach and teach well.

Teachers should follow assessments with high-quality
corrective actions and students should be given additional opportunities to
demonstrate mastery.

Printfriendly

About Me

I'm an associate principal at Monticello High School in Charlottesville, Virginia. Before moving to Charlottesville, I was an assistant principal at Kettle Run
High School in Nokesville, VA and before that I
taught world history, freshman seminar, individual reading and academic
coaching at Fauquier High School. I also coached girls basketball and
boys lacrosse while at FHS. Additionally, I taught and coached for 6
years at Rappahannock County High School. I also spent 1 year at Cedars
Academy in Bridgeville, Delaware.

I'm a co-moderator of #vachat, a weekly Twitter conversation for
Virginia (and non-Viriginians too) educators. We chat every Monday at 8
ET.

Most importantly, I'm a father and grandfather I have 4
wonderful children and a couple of grandchildren. In my free time, I enjoy outdoor activities, cooking,
reading, sports, and, of course, spending time with family.